In [1]}, [2]}, the authors conclude that the BBH distribution must feature anti-aligned spins at \(> 90\%\)  credibility, in contrast to the conclusion drawn in [3]} that such anti-alignment is not evident in the population. In addition, [4]} finds evidence for a non-spinning subpopulation of BHs, a conclusion which was challenged by [5]}. While technical differences exist between works, a major possible contribution to some of these differing conclusions is model misspecification; that is, different assumptions being imposed on the functional form of the spin distribution.
